Opinions

[RR]

[quote]My thoughts exactly. One thing I am at a loss at is Lure-Coursing & Agility are pretty much the only ability sports available for the RR. I would like to get my line involved in actual simulated hunts and don't know where to start. [/quote]

I do know a couple of people with tracking titles on their RRs. There is a yahoo group for hunting ridgebacks [url]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RR_Hunting/[/url] Perhaps someone on the list knows who to contact for that. I know a RR couple who enjoy hunting with their dogs.

Then, as I am sure you know there are other things like weight pulling....

I like how versatile our breed is :)

[RR]

Mama AJ I like your view on breeding. :)


.......and I like a versatile dog. For me, its not so much the titles dogs can get that hold great meaning, the meaning comes with breeders who are dedicated to be involved in conformation shows and performance events and produce dogs capable of it all, as well as breeding for health, temperament and type!

[Kiger]

[quote name='Horsefeathers!']
Then again, ignorance may be bliss in this sense. Maybe if I go into this thinking that I can do it and it will work, it will.
[/quote]

You never know until you try, right? :)
If you already know how to do the grooming, you should be fine!

[Mary's Mama]

Here is a link to check out:
[url]http://www.poodleclubofamerica.org/performance.htm[/url]

Looks like this club offers all the things you are looking for and since it is breed specific it may not be so political.

[Carolk9s]

[quote name='Kiger']I don't see how it would matter which registry you use for agility if the events are similar. I don't know much about it, but aren't the same skills required across the registries?[/quote]

er, yes and no. Basic skills are the same but beyond novice, AKC is more about speed and obstacle discrimanation, UKC is more about control and some very different types of obstacles. At this time UKC still does not have weave poles in Novice, AKC now does.

[Rowie-the-Pooh]

Waaaaaaaaaaaay off topic, well actually, kinda in topic...anyway...

I was watching this show on National Geographic, where they follow the breeders/handlers before the show, during the show, and after the show...

There was a Saint, a Poodle, a Cocker, and I forgot the other. Anyway, the poodle was focused on most. It was a big show, Westminster, and the Poodle looked like he was going to win. But they lost! :( Anyway, right after the show, the breeder/handler took the dog back home and shaved off all his fur! And then the narrarator said :" And so, the show-winning fur that took (whatshisname) [b]4 years to grow[/b] is shaved off." I was like "Whoa, 4 years to grow?!"

I dunno my point really, but it's something about poodles! :roll:

Oh wait, how will you grow all the fur before 18 months, if it took this person 4 years? But that was for a big show, so anyway... :)

[gooeydog]

My opinion may be a bit biased, since in my favorite breed, working ability (and temperament) [i]should[/i] be far more important than being exactly tailored to the breed standard, but here it is anyway :lol: . If your dog is physically sound, has the basic physical characteristics of its breed, and has great working ability; then I feel that dog could be an asset in a working dog breeding program. Up until this century, very little emphasis was placed on the APBT's conformation, at least not in the terminology used today. They [i]had[/i] to be conformationally sound, because of the work they were required to do in their everyday lives. If a dog didn't have a good bite, or was weak in the rear, or too turned out in the front, it would have a harder time keeping up with the dogs of good working ability who had exceptional physical traits, and would usually end up not being bred. If you look at a typical conformation winning AmStaff (the foundation stock for the AmStaff breed was dogs of the APBT breed, but the two breeds took "different roads" afterwards, one towards being "conformationally correct", one towards being able to work), while it's standing next to an APBT out of working stock, you would easily be able to tell which was closer to the actual working dog the breeds used to be, and which had turned "pretty" in the name of "good conformation".

So, I guess what I'm getting at is that if you want working dogs, find dogs that can work, and don't worry so much about them being "correct" according to the standard. Look towards other breeds (or "old" versions of your breed) that still CAN work (and do similar work to that of your breed), and try to see what makes them able to excell at that, then look for dogs in your breed that have those traits as well. I'm not saying to completely go against the standard, just that if you want a real working dog (one that could handle the original work of huntng for hours a day or whatever), you may have to breed dogs that are not quite "up to standard", but have the traits needed to actually do the work. For working purposes, I'd take a dog with superior working ability, and numerous minor faults (that wouldn't affect their ability to work/live/be happy) over a dog with little working ability, and "perfect" conformation (according to standard) anyday.

Also, I'd be wary of people who try to pass off agility, obedience, etc as "working titles", as they reflect more on the owner's dedication and (less, but still) the dog's trainability, than on the dog's actaul working instincts. I don't know much about poodles, but they were originally water retrieval dogs, right? So field trials, hunting titles, etc would have more weight than obedience, agility, etc. Not that those type of things aren't good, too; and are still much better than a dog titled strictly in conformation :lol:

Mary's mama has a good idea about the breed clubs, too. Usually they offer more activities individualized for their particular breed.